Technologies for intensification in SW Uganda ... - Foodnet - cgiar

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Legend International Boundary District Boundary County Boundary Sub-County Boundary Produced By: Scale 1:450,000 M National Biomass Study, Forest Department, P.O. Box 1613, Kampala, UGANDA Tel: +256 -41 - 251779 Fax: +256 -41 - 251778 Email: NBSFD@IMUL.COM KATUNGURU BITEREKO KANYABWANGA MITOOMA RUHINDA COUNTY KASHENSHERO KICHW AMBA BUNYARUGURU COUNTY 10 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers KABIRA M RYERU M KYAMU HUNGA M NYABUBARE M M IGARA COUNTY KAKAN JU MUTARA BUSHENYI TOWN COUNCIL BUMBEIRE KITAGATA M KATERERA KYABUGIMBI KYEIZOBA BUGONGI BURERE BIHANGA BUHWEJU COUNTY SHUUKU KYANGENYI SHEEMA COUNTY KAGANGO RWEN GWE KIGARAMA M KARUNGU N M = 8 most active sub-counties Figure 2.8: Market Activity in Bushenyi District as Proxied by Government Revenue from Market Centres o Lack of processing and value adding There is a strong interestfor more investment in processing and value adding by farmers and local leaders, particularly for perishable commodities, such as milk, fruits and vegetables. Various milk cooling plants, cheese and yogurt producers and a fruit processing enterprise in Kasese are examples of industries that are already functioning in the southwest. Equally cotton ginneries, tea and coffee factories and grain milling facilities, honey marketing associations added value to less perishable products. Data from Bushenyi District shows that there are large numbers of coffee and tea factories as well as milk cooling plants. This is facilitating farmer expansion in these key cash crops. However, the number of other processors in the district (e.g. bakeries, animal feeds) is very low. This is characteristic of the other districts as well. Of course, catalyzing or strengthening rural non-farm development is an age-old problem that is not easily solved. 20
o Input availability, costs and knowledge With the few exceptions of contract farming, all smallholder farming in southwestern Uganda can be described as low external input farming. Basic supplies of pesticides and veterinary drugs are available in the main towns and trading centers. Uganda is well known for its very low use of fertilizer. As a cause or consequence, or both, it is not surprising that fertilizer availability is poor in the southwest, even in many of the trading centers. Asked why they wouldn’t use inputs farmers cited both high costs and lack of knowledge as reasons. Indeed, use of a good number of inputs do not appear to be profitable under current economic conditions, i.e. fertilizer for low value crops such as sorghum. However, on the other hand farmers reported total losses of crops that could have been prevented with relatively cheap inputs. Equally, overcoming the above-mentioned issues on product quality will require improved management including increased input use. Evaluating economic returns to inputs under on-farm conditions use should form the basis for appropriate recommendations. Knowledge of extension workers and farmers on appropriate and economic input use levels needs to be strengthened. Also, working with input dealers to review the units for sale may enhance the use of inputs as farmers often prefer to purchase smaller quantities. o High poverty rates and low capitalization for investments We were not able to obtain precise measures of poverty nor how poverty relates to farm investments. However, much is known about the nature of the relationship from studies in other countries. There are efforts underway to develop highly disaggregated poverty maps for all of Uganda (with the World Bank and AERC). When these are completed, these additional data will be important to better understand the nature of constraints to intensification as well as opportunities for targeting interventions. 21
Page 1 and 2: REPORT ON A SURVEY TO IDENTIFY SUIT
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Area and
Page 7 and 8: 1. Introduction 1.1 Background USAI
Page 9 and 10: the intensification of agriculture.
Page 11 and 12: development options to support deve
Page 13 and 14: 20: Rwenzori Footslopes and Fort Po
Page 15 and 16: Wood products from forests, plantat
Page 17 and 18: Table 2.3: Food crops in Southweste
Page 19 and 20: The intensity of agricultural exten
Page 21 and 22: years, reported by Bolwig et. al (2
Page 23 and 24: movements as other areas. This may
Page 25: matoke, for instance. Aside from su
Page 29 and 30: ange of niches for production of co
Page 31 and 32: Description is a brief description
Page 33 and 34: personnel, and farmers. Data on mar
Page 35 and 36: Enhanced productivity Quantity Qual
Page 37 and 38: Cash inputs required Land inputs re
Page 39 and 40: 4. Technology inventory To generate
Page 41 and 42: Table 4.2: Annual crops in SW Ugand
Page 43 and 44: Improved maize varieties are availa
Page 45 and 46: African Growth and Opportunities Ac
Page 47 and 48: Coffee (arabica) This crop thrives
Page 49 and 50: o Citrus: can best be grown at alti
Page 51 and 52: A major problem is lack of continuo
Page 53 and 54: o Many interventions in natural res
Page 55 and 56: in the southwest, but it is used pr
Page 57 and 58: Description Technology Environmenta
Page 59 and 60: Description 1. Contour hedgerows Te
Page 61 and 62: Description Wetland farming Farm wo
Page 63 and 64: delineate areas where new technolog
Page 65 and 66: Overall, there is little scope for
Page 67 and 68: • Local leaders and farmers are a
Page 69 and 70: 5.2.4 What next ? To make options f
Page 71 and 72: These biological conservation measu
Page 73 and 74: We did observe examples of these du
Page 75 and 76: • Dual-purpose goats (produce mil
Page 77 and 78:
ulking and distribution while with
Page 79:
NARO 2001: Scientific Conference
show all

Technologies for intensification in SW Uganda ... - Foodnet - cgiar

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?